ENERGY
& ENVIRONMENT
Climate scientists take swipe at Exxon Mobil,
industry in leaked report
A top lobbyist for the oil major was caught on camera
acknowledging working with groups engaging in disinformation campaigns.
By ZACK
COLMAN and KARL MATHIESEN
07/02/2021
10:00 AM EDT
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/02/climate-scientists-exxon-mobile-report-497805
A recently
leaked draft report written by some of the world’s top climate scientists
blamed disinformation and lobbying campaigns — including by Exxon Mobil — for
undermining government efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
increasing the dangers of global warming to society.
The draft
report, which has been reviewed by POLITICO and other news organizations in
recent days, is part of an upcoming review of climate science by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, a body that brings together scientists from around the
globe to examine the state of climate research. The draft dedicates part of its
North America section to public “resistance to climate change science.”
Details from
the leaked report began emerging last week, days before a British television
broadcaster aired a video showing a top Exxon Mobil lobbyist admitting the
company worked with "shadow groups" that engaged in disinformation
campaigns around climate science, a tactic that allowed the company to avoid
direct scrutiny. The news has prompted some Democratic lawmakers to step up
efforts to force oil majors to disclose money flows to groups that seek to
undermine climate action.
The draft
IPCC report blamed think tanks, foundations, trade associations and other
third-party groups that represent fossil fuel companies for promoting
“contrarian” science that misleads the public and disrupts efforts to implement
climate policies needed to address the rising threats,
“Rhetoric
on climate change and the undermining of science have contributed to
misperceptions of the scientific consensus, uncertainty, unduly discounted risk
and urgency, dissent, and, most importantly, polarized public support delaying
mitigation and adaptation action, particularly in the US,” the report said.
On
Wednesday, Britain's Channel 4 broadcast a video of Exxon lobbyist Keith McCoy
telling Greenpeace UK activists who were posing as headhunters that the oil
giant would “aggressively fight against some of the science” including by using
third-party “shadow groups.” McCoy also noted his lobbying efforts to strip
climate provisions from President Joe Biden’s infrastructure proposal, many of
which were dropped in a $1.2 trillion compromise framework.
The IPCC
report said disinformation tactics have created “risks to society” because they
have prevented governments from responding to the dangers from climate change.
The draft
is subject to approval by governments and the language may change before it is
released. But the presence of the language on disinformation campaigns in the
draft represents an unusual political rebuke from the science community in its
most high-profile climate report — which is produced about every seven years.
Rep. Ro
Khanna (D-Calif.), who chairs the environment subcommittee of the House
Oversight and Reform Committee, said he has “spoken to a number of people in
leadership” about issuing subpoenas to compel testimony from Exxon, Chevron,
and other oil and gas companies at forthcoming hearings on dark money influence
on climate change disinformation and the role social media plays spreading
climate falsehoods.
Khanna said
that he and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also will write legislation
requiring fossil fuel companies to disclose money flows to groups that distort
climate science and stall climate policy, a point the IPCC draft affirms.
“It is a
major problem. One of the reasons that we haven't had action is that we don't
have a common source of facts,” Khanna told POLITICO. “Until we solve the
climate disinformation issue or at least mitigate the issue, it becomes very
hard to build a broad-based political consensus that is needed to take the kind
of bold steps that are needed to tackle the crisis.”
Exxon did
not respond to a request for comment. CEO Darren Woods said in a statement on
Wednesday the company “condemn[s] the statements," which he said did not
represent the company's stances on climate change.
Veterans of
the last major climate battle in Congress on either side of the aisle agreed
that falsehoods and distortions of climate science upended chances of passing
legislation.
Former
South Carolina Republican Rep. Bob Inglis told POLITICO that he underestimated
how influential dark money groups were at steering climate inaction. Inglis
attributed part of the reason he lost a 2010 primary election to his support
for a carbon tax as an alternative to cap-and-trade legislation authored by
then-Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Ed Markey, now the junior Democratic
senator from Massachusetts.
“I was
apparently a little bit slow to understand,” Inglis said. “It looked like
grassroots, but it’s really astroturf. But you gotta hand it to them: They had
quite a supply chain of astroturf that they delivered to certain districts and
rolled it out — rolled right over me.
“They did a
much better job than the buggy whip manufacturers introducing doubt about Henry
Ford's machine,” he added.
Waxman’s
cap-and-trade bill passed the House in 2009 but ultimately died in the Senate.
He said climate disinformation, dark money groups and the fossil fuel industry
played an integral role in the legislation’s fate. He told POLITICO that the
IPCC identifying that behavior as an obstacle to climate policy would be “a
wake-up call for a lot of people who might not come to the conclusion that
they’ve been lied to by a campaign of misinformation.”
Exxon in
particular has been the subject of criticism over revelations that it for
decades funded groups that sowed doubt about the certainty that humans drive
climate change, largely through burning fossil fuels, despite its own internal
research confirming that science.
Trade
associations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum
Institute, which count fossil fuel companies as members, also have historically
lobbied against climate action. Both have recently modified their positioning
on climate, though critics contend they do not go far enough in advocating for
policies that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the scale necessary to
keep global temperatures in check.
“As
outlined in our Climate Action Framework, the size of the global climate and
energy challenges we face require a mix of government policies, industry
actions and breakthrough innovation investments, and there’s no place in this
debate for disinformation," Megan Bloomgren, API senior vice president of
communications, said in a statement. "Our industry is out front and
transparent in the positions we take and advocate for while we drive measurable
action to reduce emissions and deliver the energy the world needs.”
The Chamber
of Commerce could not be immediately reached for comment.
Robert
Brulle, an environmental politics professor at Brown University who submitted
comments to the IPCC urging inclusion of the disinformation section, told
POLITICO he is curious whether that section will make it to the final version
because governments ultimately have to approve it.
Brulle said
the dynamic is well-documented in peer-reviewed studies, but that acknowledging
the perversion of science and discourse by fossil fuel interests could be
anathema to countries overwhelmingly dependent on oil and gas revenues, such as
Saudi Arabia and Russia.
“That's
really not a scientific decision, that's a political decision to ignore that,”
he said.
FILED UNDER: EXXONMOBIL, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário